LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION

RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE

MEETING MINUTES
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2009 AT 1:30 P.M.

Roll Call

Participants:

Richard C. Stanley, Chair

Susan B. Barnett, Committee Member
Jennifer B. Bechet, Committee Member, via conference call
Shaun G. Clarke, Committee Member
Val P. Exnicios, Committee Member
Pablo Gonzalez, Committee Member
Sam Gregorio, Committee Member, via conference call
Sheryl M. Howard, Committee Member
Clare F. Jupiter, Committee Member
Michelle Marney, Committee Member, via conference call
Ryan M. McCabe, Committee Member
Sharrolyn J. Miles, Committee Member, via conference call
William M. Ross, Committee Member
Leslie J. Schiff, Committee Member, via conference call
Marta-Ann Schnabel, Committee Member
Joseph “Larry” Shea, Jr. Committee Member
Lauren A. McHugh, Supreme Court Liaison, Ex-officio
Richard K. Leefe, Board Liaison
Richard P. Lemmler, Jr., Ethics Counsel
Eric Barefield, Assistant Ethics Counsel
William King, Professional Programs Counsel

Not Participating:

Michael J. Begoun, Committee Member

Dane S. Ciolino, Committee Member
Paula H. Clayton, Committee Member
Harry S. Hardin, III, Committee Member
Paul J. Hebert, Committee Member
Christine Lipsey, Committee Member
Edward Walters, Jr., Committee Member
Charles B. Plattsmier, Disciplinary Liaison, Ex-officio
Cheri Cotogno Grodsky, Associate Executive Director for Professional Programs

Agenda Item 1. Roll Call

The Chair, Richard C. Stanley, called the meeting to order. Business was conducted in
accordance with the agenda below. New Committee members were welcomed to the Rules of

1
Professional Conduct Committee and the mission statement of the committee was discussed.
Agenda Item 2. Approval of January 6, 2009 Meeting Minutes

The minutes from the meeting held on January 6, 2009 were adopted by the Committee.

Agenda Item 3. Request for Opinion – May 20, 2008 letter from Leslie Schiff

Leslie Schiff discussed the issue of predatory lenders obtaining interests in litigation in violation
of the spirit of revised 1.8(e). This is an ongoing problem for plaintiff lawyers who want to
follow the letter and spirit of the rules.

Marta Schnabel indicated she is aware of two related problems. The first is that it is possible that
some of the lenders obtaining litigation interests might be advertising in the Bar Journal.
Further, there is a parallel problem where third party medical providers are up-charging their
advanced costs in certain cases.

The consensus of the Committee was to appoint a subcommittee to define the scope of the
problem and determine if there may be a solution. Leslie Schiff, Marta Schnabel and Val
Exnicios volunteered to be on the Subcommittee.

Agenda Item 4. Resolution re: Rule XIX and Adversarial Non-Client Litigation
Complaints

This matter was deferred until Paul Hebert or one of the authors of the resolution can speak on
the issue. It was noted that any resolution for the midyear meeting would need to be filed in
December. This resolution should be put on the agenda for the next meeting to hear from the
authors.

Agenda Item 5. Rule 26(f) modification

Bill Ross submitted a revised Rule XIX, Section 26(f) that would complement the Committee’s
prior action on Rule XIX, Section 26(a). The Committee will review and study the rule change
for the next meeting.

Agenda Item 6. Rules Regarding Mass Torts – Val Exnicios

For the next meeting, Val Exnicios will make a short report with the top (5) issues concerning
mass torts where there may need a rule review.

Agenda Item 7. 3.8 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct

There was discussion concerning the new Model Rule. While some committee members were
in favor of the new rule it was the consensus that the rule needed more study. An email
discussion of the merits and negatives of the rule was encouraged. The Public Defenders’
Association and the Right to Counsel Committee should be approached about their views. The
Chief Public Defender in the state should be contacted to comment. The rule should be put on
the website again for more comment.

Any decision in favor of the rule would need to go to the LSBA House of Delegates. This would

2
best be at a Mid-year meeting where those with a stake in the rule would be allowed to speak.
This rule would be controversial. The Supreme Court would ultimately decide on
implementation.

Agenda Item 8. New ABA Model Rule 1.10 – Dane Ciolino

This item was deferred.

Agenda Item 9. Recommendation to add ethics to the essay portion of the bar exam –
Dane Ciolino

This item was deferred.

Agenda Item 10. Lawyer Advertising (Informational Item)

Richard Lemmler offered and presented a Lawyer Advertising educational session immediately
after the Rules of Professional Conduct meeting for interested committee members.

Adjournment